I really don't mind Channing Tatum's character Duke killed off in the begining.

That's nothing uncommon. Mortal Kombat 2, Johnny Cage was killed off at the start of the movie.

In X Men 3, they killed off Cyclops in the begining too.

Those are both terrible films, but Cage dying was a part of the MK storyline in the games anyway, so at least it was faithful. Cyclops being killed is a pretty infamous move in the X-Men franchise, one of the worst.

A four-minute preview of the highly anticipated G.I. Joe: Retaliation will be shown in IMAX, RealD and digital 3D theaters with Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, beginning on January 24th. To debut the footage from the sequel and give a glimpse of what audiences can expect from the 3D conversion, Paramount invited a handful of online press, including Collider, over to the studio lot.

Following the footage, we participated in a roundtable interview with producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura who talked about what it’s like to be involved with franchises like G.I. Joe and Transformers that fans are so passionate about, his initial reaction to the news of the delayed release date, why they decided to focus more heavily on the ninjas this time, finding the balance between humor and drama, how he judges whether or not they’ve pushed an established franchise too far, what he feels the 3D adds to the film, why it’s important for the director of a film to love the genre they’re working in, and what his tenure at Warner Bros. taught him about handling a franchise, as a producer. Hit the jump for what he had to say, as well as my thoughts on the footage.

As someone who, more often than not, doesn’t understand what 3D does to enhance the film-going experience, I have to admit that I am always skeptical when something is presented to me in that format, especially when it’s converted quickly without much thought given to anything other than extra money at the box office. However, in the case of G.I. Joe: Retaliation, it is obviously apparent that the release date delay was so that the proper care and time could be devoted to doing the conversion properly, and what has resulted is a depth that adds to the thrill-ride and a vibrancy of color that has me excited to see more.

What we were shown was an abbreviated four-minute version of a larger 10-minute silent fight sequence in the Himalayas, between Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park), that was not only really cool (with ninjas, throwing stars, sword fighting, gun play and zip lines), but also easily illustrated how the filmmakers plan to enhance the experience for audiences. And the small glimpse of the banter from both Bruce Willis and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson showed that, while this film is definitely grittier than the first one, it also isn’t taking itself too seriously.

Question: What’s it like to be a part of big franchise films like this?

LORENZO DI BONAVENTURA: I had a really funny thing happen to me that’s really indicative of how crazy in love people are with these kinds of things. I actually had a heart issue in London, just before the holiday. It turned out fine, but I was on an operating table and they were giving me an angiogram, and the technician started talking to me. He said, “I am the biggest Transformers fan! Are you the producer of Transformers?” I was like, “What are you talking about?!” It went on for awhile, and it was kind of absurd. At one moment, he stopped and said, “Do you want me to stop talking?,” and I said, “No. It’s the first time I haven’t thought about dying in the last few hours. Keep talking.” He took his pants down and he was wearing Bumblebee underwear. That kind of passion that it actually does create for people is awesome.

As a guy who’s been on both sides, having run Warner Bros. for awhile and now being a producer, what was your reaction when you found out about the release date shift?
DI BONAVENTURA: There were a ton of stories that were completely inaccurate, that we shot all this new footage for Channing [Tatum], and all that stuff. We never shot another frame. I’ve been asked about that, over the last few months, I don’t know how many times. My experience is that you can’t possibly win against whatever the tidal wave is that’s coming at you. One of the reasons I wanted to show the first round of footage was to go, “Look, guys, this is what we’re doing,” so you can decide for yourselves about the quality of it and the attitude of it, and you can hear from us about what we’ve been doing. The only way it will get out there is if enough of you all start saying, “Wait a second, they didn’t have new re-shoots or all this stuff.”

But there will be some people who are sad there’s not more Channing Tatum.

DI BONAVENTURA: Yeah, there will be, for sure. But, there will be some people that are really happy that Bruce Willis and The Rock have plenty of time. It’s hard when you have three guys, all of which you want to see be the lead.

Are you deliberately emphasizing the fact that this is a very different film from the first one?

DI BONAVENTURA: I don’t know if deliberate is the right word, but I think it is a consequence of what it became, in a way. I really wanted to make the second film more grounded and give a greater sense of grit. The action pictures I’ve been typically involved with, when somebody gets punched, you really feel the punching, and when somebody gets shot, you really feel the shot. When Jon [Chu] came in, that was one of the things he said to me that made me go, “Okay, I can see why we’re going to do this picture together.” That’s what I wanted to see in the second movie. By casting Bruce and The Rock, they’re both, by definition, grounded characters with who they are, so I think the movie does have a different sensibility.

Why did you decide to focus so heavily on ninjas, this time?

DI BONAVENTURA: One of the big complaints about the first movie was that there were not enough ninjas. That’s one of the reasons why there’s a major storyline that goes on, that’s only about ninjas. It’s really fun. It’s a great sense of fantasy, when you go into that world.

Is the 10-minute silent scene your homage to “Silent Interlude”?

DI BONAVENTURA: That was our whole motivation. There was actually a sound in the middle of it, which we took out. It’s really fun! I think the comic book fan who grew up with that is going to love the homage to that, and the fan that has no idea about that will find it a cool sequence.

Where do you lie, between the comic book fan, the cartoon and the action figures?

DI BONAVENTURA: I’m an original Joe guy. I’m too old, unfortunately. Another complaint we had after the first movie was that the people who grew up with the original Joe felt a little bit like, “What world did I enter, here?” Bruce Willis plays Joe Colton, who is the original Joe. So, anybody who grew up with that, now has a bellwether in the movie. Bruce dresses, acts like and says things that sound like the guy that I grew up with, but he’s now existing within a larger mythology that the comic books brought to life. In a way, The Rock does a little bit of the grounding too, in the sense that, if you can imagine the ideal soldier, you think of him. He’s a little bit like the guy I grew up with, but he’s a character of this mythology. One of the things we were trying to do with the movie was to bridge those two things. Bruce Willis and I traded stories about what awful things we did to our G.I. Joe, growing up. So, for those guys, like me, who grew up with that, now we have a character that anchors the movie.

How did you find the balance between the humor and the drama?
DI BONAVENTURA: Somebody I know once said, “Funny is money.” When these big action pictures don’t have a sense of humor, they’re just too dry and they take themselves way too seriously. I guess, every once in awhile, there are certain ones where that works. But for me, I think the audience is coming to this kind of picture to have fun. They want to be wowed, they want to laugh, and they want to relate to the characters. Bruce and The Rock have great comedic timing. There’s some very organic simple humor that goes on within the picture that the writers scripted, and there was some that the writers didn’t script, that happened just because of who they are. And Bruce is always a guy who comes up with great one-liners, for himself and for other characters. It’s really interesting. So, I’m always trying to pick his brain for some ideas ‘cause he’s always got a couple of great ones. There’s a fair amount of humor in the picture. It’s that fine line where you want to take yourself seriously, but not too seriously. If you take yourself too seriously, then it gets a little brittle. The ninjas are flying around, so you can’t be serious. But, if you take yourself not seriously enough, it loses its gravity. What I keep searching for in movies, more and more, is the right gravity. When you don’t take it seriously enough, then why is the audience supposed to invest in the drama? If a character dies, you should feel that. If a character accomplishes something, you should feel that. That’s where you try to find that balance. It’s impossible to articulate, as you go through it. You just have to recognize it.

You’ve worked on a couple of big Hasbro franchises and been entrusted with these huge properties that mean so much to people, over generations. What have you learned about how far you can take things without hurting the thing that it was originally?
DI BONAVENTURA: I have a very simple measure of it, for me. The first thing I believe is, if you don’t change it a bit, it’s not going to work. You don’t want it to be exactly what you remember it as. I remember with Transformers 1 and G.I. Joe 1, you could hear people go, “They screwed it up! Oh, my god, they’ve destroyed my childhood!” And then, you look back at those cartoons and they were great when you were a kid, but when you look at them now, they’re clunky as hell. You’re like, “Really?! You want the robots to look like that?! You want the Joes to really talk like that and be like that?! No, I don’t think so!” If you’re not evolving it forward, it’s not going to work. It’s going to piss a few people off, but the vast majority are either going to come along, if they were fans, or they’re going to suddenly become fans, if they weren’t fans. Part of our responsibility is to bring new people to the table. They may have dismissed G.I. Joe when they were young, but now they can take away things that Joe stands for, like loyalty, responsibility, valor, comradery, and those sorts of things. I don’t take those things lightly. So, you have to take it with great seriousness, and you have to take it with a great sense of evolution. I always consult five to ten people who are hardcore fans, to see how far I can push it. When they go, “Wait a second, you can’t do that! That’s a sin!,” you go, “Okay, fine, we’re not going to do that. We tried too far.”

So, no PSAs from The Rock?

DI BONAVENTURA: We debated the PSAs. We tried it in the movie, but every time you read it, it was so self-conscious that it didn’t stick. But in the marketing, you may see some nods to the PSAs, for sure.

Was there a conversation at the beginning of this, where you talked about doing the film in 3D, or did that only come later on?

DI BONAVENTURA: Yes, in the beginning of it, when Paramount first greenlit it, they said they wanted to shoot it in 3D, and we did, too. But, we couldn’t mount the movie in 12 weeks and shoot it in 3D, and they said we didn’t have anymore time, so we all agreed on shooting it in 2D. When the news came that we were going to get pushed, it was shocking, at first. You gear your life to that thing, and then, suddenly, that thing is not there anymore. But then, you go, “You’re going to spend more money to make our movie better? Great!”

Did the studio just drop the change in release date on you, one day?

DI BONAVENTURA: Yeah, pretty much. It was shocking, at first, not because you’re like, “Oh, my god, what a horrible thing?,” but your life, your vacations, your kids and your work flow are going right towards there. You plan your whole life around that thing, and then, suddenly, you’re changing a date. When they gave us the reason, Jon and I both looked at each other and said, “Let’s go!” It probably helps me a bit, having been a head of a studio ‘cause there are a lot of different reasons why you move a film. There are plenty of examples where it’s been indicative of a movie that’s not good, and there are plenty of examples where that has nothing to do with it. You’ve just got to be willing to brace yourself a little bit for the initial outbreak of, “Oh, the movie sucks! They didn’t believe in it!” That’s pretty short-lived though, in its duration.

Were you concerned with retailers having already gotten the toys and merchandise?

DI BONAVENTURA: That was hard for them. That’s different than for the filmmakers. For us, we thought, “Okay, great!” I look at the 3D and I’m like, “Wow, this looks really cool!” I’m happy that we’ve done it. I didn’t have to mount stuff in my store, and then take it down and grumble about stock.

How do you counter people who feel like 3D is just gimmicky and doesn’t really add anything to a story, especially when it’s not actually shot that way? What do you think converting this film to 3D brought to it, that it didn’t have in 2D?

DI BONAVENTURA: I think there’s a freshness to it. Knowing the film so well, I see a scene now and I’m like, “Wow, that’s totally different.” It’s almost like seeing the film again, for the first time. For those people who haven’t seen it yet, 3D is very dynamic and, when you get it right, it’s visually appealing. I don’t know if everyone will love it, or even like it, but I look at it and say that it adds a whole [new layer]. There’s the element that 3D adds that’s playful and fun, and then there are things where, as a filmmaker, you look and go, “Wow, that scene felt like a normal scene, but because of the depth of it, it just feels different.” I think two, three or four years from now, when we’re so used to 3D, it won’t have that effect. But right now, it feels different.

What was it about Jon M. Chu’s take on the film that appealed to you?
DI BONAVENTURA: Jon has a really strong sense of aesthetic. From the beginning, he aligned with me about how to make this as gritty as it could feel, but also as comic booky as it could feel. It was about trying to find the duality of that, which I thought was so successful with The Joker. That was very comic booky, but it was very gritty. That’s the pinnacle of it, in that character and the way Chris Nolan did that. That’s what we tried to accomplish here. Some filmmakers want to make apologies about the kinds of movies they make, genre wise, but he wasn’t making any apologies about making a comic book movie. He was really excited to make a comic book movie. The hardest thing, as a producer, is to find a director who does the picture for all the right reasons, and not just because they know it’s successful or that they can do a good job, but in their bones, they love that genre. Jon loved the genre.

What did your tenure at Warner Bros. include, franchise wise, and what did that teach you about how to handle it now, as a producer?

DI BONAVENTURA: The touchstones for me would be The Matrix, which I pushed through, and Harry Potter, which I bought. Those two franchises taught me a lot about quality of effects, quality of execution, and the retail side of it and how mammoth that is. A lot of people say, “Oh, you’re just making toys and sheets,” but I’m always amazed. That guy had Bumblebee underwear on! A lot of people look at that and go, “It’s so commercial,” but that’s nonsense. It’s part of our world. It means people are passionate about it. How great is it that they had Star Wars sheets? It doesn’t make me turn my nose up at the movie because there are things like that. I think it can go a little too far sometimes. I remember being petitioned for the Harry Potter toilet paper, and I thought that might be a little far. There are certain times where people take it too far. But, one of the great things about movies is that people get that excited about what you’re doing. I just shot two movies in England and the Harry Potter tour is this huge thing there. I love that that occurred. I love it for [J.K. Rowling], I love it for all the filmmakers, and I love it for all of us who got to be a part of it. We did something right.

A four-minute preview of the highly anticipated G.I. Joe: Retaliation will be shown in IMAX, RealD and digital 3D theaters with Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, beginning on January 24th. To debut the footage from the sequel and give a glimpse of what audiences can expect from the 3D conversion, Paramount invited a handful of online press, including Collider, over to the studio lot.

Following the footage, we participated in a roundtable interview with director Jon M. Chu, who talked about the 10-minute homage to “Silent Interlude” (of which the preview shows an abbreviated version), how much of the film was shot on stage versus location work, his favorite theory about the film’s delayed release date (from last summer to March 29th), that no reshoots were done as a result and no extra footage of Channing Tatum was shot, what he thinks the 3D adds to the film, maintaining ties to the first movie while doing his own thing with this one, how the conversion turned out to be a lot more legwork than he expected, what he was most excited about bringing to the film from the G.I. Joe mythology, and how daunting it is to take on this franchise. Hit the jump for what he had to say, as well as my thoughts on the footage.

As someone who, more often than not, doesn’t understand what 3D does to enhance the film-going experience, I have to admit that I am always skeptical when something is presented to me in that format, especially when it’s converted quickly without much thought given to anything other than extra money at the box office. However, in the case of G.I. Joe: Retaliation, it is obviously apparent that the release date delay was so that the proper care and time could be devoted to doing the conversion properly, and what has resulted is a depth that adds to the thrill-ride and a vibrancy of color that has me excited to see more.

What we were shown was an abbreviated four-minute version of a larger 10-minute silent fight sequence in the Himalayas, between Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park), that was not only really cool (with ninjas, throwing stars, sword fighting, gun play and zip lines), but also easily illustrated how the filmmakers plan to enhance the experience for audiences. And the small glimpse of the banter from both Bruce Willis and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson showed that, while this film is definitely grittier than the first one, it also isn’t taking itself too seriously.

JON M. CHU: That was definitely an inspiration. That’s where it all started. Obviously, ninjas are a big part of the movie, and we thought it would make it really unique from other franchises to have both the military and the ninja side. So, we wanted to make sure that we did something really different with ninjas that we’d never seen before. And because they have masks on and they don’t talk anyway, it was just a perfect place. We could tell story with their fighting. When you see the whole sequence together, it’s really fun. In fact, the fight between Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park) has no music. We had score, a long time ago, and then we just played it once, when I was with the sound effects guys, without the music just to hear the effects, and it was so awesome. We were like, “We need to have their whole fight without music.” So, we brought it in and tried it, and knew people would freak out a little bit, but it’s so awesome that you can’t deny that it’s fun to watch them do their thing.

How much of this was shot on stage versus location work?

CHU: It was multiple levels of shooting, spread out through many months. We shot real stuff in Whistler, of all places, up in the mountains there, camping out in the snow. We had a crew up there, setting up the zip lines. They were real zip lines. That was very early in the process ‘cause we knew it was going to take a long time. Even the suits that we were designing for Snake Eyes had to be able to fit that environment. They had to go plan the mountain stuff, and it was a very hard thing of, how moveable can he be in it? Can he breathe at that altitude, with that mask on? It was really hard for him to breathe, so we had to figure that out. And she’s not in a thick outfit, but it’s freezing cold up there, so we had to find ways to keep her heated. If there was a snow storm, you had to camp out there. I think the set up crew had to camp out there a couple of times because the only way in and out was this helicopter and, if the weather wasn’t good, you just stayed. So, that was one whole piece. The other piece were the close-ups and some of the swinging stuff that we could do on a huge giant green screen. They were really swinging. We had guys with these swords who were running into each other. Trying to keep that coordinated was a whole task, in itself. And then, our editors had to piece that together. We had to figure out where the rocks were and where it all would happen.

After the delay of the film was announced, there were quite a few theories about why. Do you have a favorite theory?

CHU: Yeah, that was a crazy time! I didn’t want to answer any of the crazy rumors that were happening, at that time, but the reality was the 3D. We were told they wanted it turned into 3D, and luckily we had the time to do that. It just so happens that the March date was a date that they could do it in, and that gave us enough time to focus on it. We didn’t reshoot anything. We didn’t go in and [add] Channing. I’m not going to say what happens to Channing in the movie. You have to watch the movie. But, there wasn’t any of all that crazy stuff, so we just ignored it. It’s funny, when the new trailer came out, everyone was like, “Oh, Channing is in it way more!” I just didn’t want to say anything, but it was very interesting. There were rumors that we shot more things, but we literally didn’t shoot anything. We had done some reshoots a couple days before all that, in January, that were just some pick-up things, but that’s pretty much it.

Is there a particular scene that you think the 3D really shines with?

CHU: I think the [Himalayas scene] is really fun. We have a whole tank battle with these H.I.S.S. tanks, and a Rip Saw tank that Roadblock (Dwayne Johnson) drives around. That’s really cool in 3D. We have a great crazy prison escape, that I don’t know if I should call a prison escape. We have a great scene where Storm Shadow comes back and Cobra Commander arrives. That’s really fun in 3D ‘cause it’s all places with water and glass, and shards going everything. Ultimately, this is a spectacle movie. It’s a really fun movie to experience, and the 3D only helps. If we were this big dramatic, dark movie, I’m not sure it would be worth that wait, but it only lifted our biggest strengths.

How did you approach maintaining ties to the first movie while doing your own thing?

CHU: We’re in that same world, in terms of being a continuation of that story. But, what’s great about G.I. Joe as a brand, over the years, everybody reinvents it in a different way. The cartoon brought its own interpretation. So, I had a lot of freedom to create the tone of this world, which was really nice. I’m amazed how many people saw the last movie. Everywhere we go, people know it because it plays on TV a lot and so many people saw it in the theater. This is definitely a continuation. The President, at the end of that movie, is not who he says he is, and we take it from there and move on. Obviously, Duke (Channing Tatum) is in our movie, and we refer to some of those other characters, but we don’t hang onto all those things. We leave a lot of things open-ended, so that we’re exploring this part of the world, but maybe this part of the world can keep going in a different other way. You can jump to different parts of the G.I. Joe universe, if you wanted to. That was really important. One of my biggest challenges was to fit those things together. But ultimately, it’s because of G.I. Joe that the history of G.I. Joe fit well. We have this great opening prologue that helps paint a little bit of how the world is and where we are in that.

Because the villains in the G.I. Joe world are so bright and colorful, were you ever worried about getting people to root for the good guys, over the villains?

CHU: Yes and no. You have Dwayne and Bruce, and you’re going to root for them, no matter what. They can even be a little more bad-ass than normal, and you’re good with them. Of course, the bad guys in our movie are really kick-ass. They go for it. Harder than that is just that the humor of the movie is very real-world, but at the same time, we’re trying not to take ourselves too seriously. Everything does have a little wink and a nod to what the spirit of G.I. Joe has always been, to me, at least. It is a crazy, weird world, even though you’re supposed to believe it co-exists with us, maybe six years in the future. More difficult for me was when do we not take ourselves too seriously and when do we actually have to play the real danger of it.

In doing the 3D conversion process, were there specific scenes that turned out to be more challenging or that you had to make the most adjustments for, or did the whole thing turn out smoother than you expected it to be?

CHU: It is more legwork than I expected. To get it right takes not one, three, five or six go-arounds. It takes 12 to 20 go-arounds, literally watching the scenes, over and over again, and just making little adjustments, here and there. That feels more freeing than even when we shoot in 3D because you can’t adjust some of the things that we can adjust, like some of the edges we want to clean up. There are scenes that are cut fast. We actually are still in that process of finding those things. That’s something we learned on the dance stuff, that you can do those things. We’ve got to push it and get all the fun moments and keep going back, over and over, to see where we need to control it a bit more. So, we’re in that process, right now. There are some fast moments in this movie. There are some fast action things that we want to do in it, and we don’t want the 3D to restrict those either. The hybrid is a fun thing. We get to play both sides. That just takes focus and time.

Being a big fan of G.I. Joe, was there something you most loved bringing to the big screen?

CHU: The H.I.S.S. tank was a dream. I guess it was written in the script originally, but to actually build the thing [was cool]. The last movie felt like, “Oh, there’s a lot of CG stuff, so we’ll just build on green.” But going in, I was like, “We’ve gotta build this stuff,” not really knowing if they were going to spend the money or if we could actually build a life-size H.I.S.S. tank that goes up and down, moves and rolls around. There was some resistance, of course. They were like, “You can’t do that! It’s going to take months and months to even design and build, and then it’s not going to be able to move.” But, we got it! So, the H.I.S.S. tank, in itself, was pretty awesome. Firefly’s (Ray Stevenson) motorcycle is really cool. We went through a ton of different versions of that. And the masks were my biggest surprise, with how intricate and difficult it was to get a good looking mask for these guys, like with Cobra Commander and Snake Eyes. Even just helmets can go way wrong, really quickly. I wanted to nod to the stuff that I knew, as a kid. I didn’t want to say, “This is a brand new Snake Eyes,” that was not the Snake Eyes that you know. I wanted the Snake Eyes that I played with. So, we got to play around with that. We went crazy. We did over 60 designs of Snake Eyes, and probably over 100 of just what his visor would be like. Those are tough. With the tint, do you go more amber or do you go more black? And then, you are dealing with the history of what it is, and you still want to give something fresh. So, those choices were made, piece by piece. The details for Cobra, just with what those gears would be and what he was actually doing. Is he breathing through it? Are we ever going to see his eyes? Is he just moving around like that? But, when you have people like Ray Park play Snake Eyes, it really is different. We had stunt doubles go in for a certain moment, here and there, and you can tell that there’s no acting there. Whereas with Ray, you know the personality. He has a humor about him. It’s a very strange thing that he does with Snake Eyes, but he’s funny when he’s in there. When Rock talks to him and they communicate in silence, it’s a fun thing. They actually have that communication, which is funny.

The first G.I. Joe didn’t get the greatest reviews, so were you at all hesitant about taking over the reins of the franchise?

CHU: No, I wasn’t hesitant. I jumped at the chance, obviously. It was an amazing opportunity to make a movie of characters that I know and love, even if I wasn’t the biggest comic book guy who knew every issue of everything G.I. Joe. It was the cartoon that I really was a part of. And I loved the first movie. I had a lot of fun with it, but it wasn’t necessarily my G.I. Joe experience. I remember when it was coming out, I was like, “It’s gotta do this, this, this, this, this, this and this.” And then, I saw the movie and was like, “Oh, that was a little bit different, but it was still enjoyable and fun.” So, when they offered me the movie, I knew I could go back to that list. It’s hard because you get lost along the way sometimes, and things change and characters shift, but I always tried to remind myself of the things that I always wanted in a G.I. Joe movie. You want the ninjas right up against the military guys. You want that humor. You want that comradery. You want to know that each one is different. They’re not just a group fighting one thing. They all have personality. Even if it doesn’t really make sense, you want it to be fun and just go for it. If you think about all those things, I don’t know if this movie is necessarily for you. This is just a fun ride. You get to experience this mash-up of all these genres. In a way, G.I. Joe was mash-up before mash-up ever existed. Everybody has their own sound, which was really fun to do.

How daunting is it to take on the G.I. Joe franchise?

CHU: Just in taking something that I grew up with and having the opportunity [to do my take on it], it’s scary. You know everyone is watching, including every person that you’ve ever talked to Joe about. My friends and I would collect the toys and go to the different conventions. I would call my friends a lot of the time and be like, “Do you think this is weird? Is it jacked up, if we do this, or do you think it’s okay?” It’s a daunting task. I can’t rely on those immediate feelings for certain things because it would throw my process off. I just have to trust that the reason I love the property is probably the reason it was working, at the time. Having Bruce [Willis] be the original Joe was really trippy. You want him to be the original Joe, in every way. If he didn’t want to do this movie, we probably wouldn’t have Joe in the movie. It was only because we said, “This would be our dream, as a G.I. Joe fan, to have the guy who represents it be the guy who represents all action movies of our generation, growing up.” It just worked right. And we have him next to the next generation’s action guy. There’s not a lot of action heroes anymore, and the guy who’s picking up all of that is The Rock. And that’s a theme in our movie. At some point, you don’t have your laser guns and your spaceships and your hovercrafts, and all that stuff. It’s just about the soldier or the ninja, or the person who’s fighting the uphill battle, and it’s about what’s inside. Bruce comes into this movie, as the original Joe, saying, “We didn’t have any of that stuff. You don’t need all that stuff. We’ll go old school, in that way.” That was fun, and it helped frame our visual look and style of our storytelling.

Were there things that you wanted to do, but ended up deciding against doing in the film, or did you get some version of everything on your dream list into the movie?

CHU: Yes, for sure. I wanted to do a lot more nods than we probably have in the movie, but some of them were just so random that it didn’t fit. It just confused people. We still have to deal with, not only people understanding where the first movie came from, but people who have never seen it before and have no idea who G.I. Joe is. When you see Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow, we have people who don’t know who’s bad and who’s good, and you’re like, “Don’t you know?! It’s the ultimate rivalry!” And they’re like, “No. Usually, the guy in white is the good guy and the guy in black is the bad guy.” And I’m like, “No, it’s the exact opposite, guys!” It’s hard because then we have to explain what happened with them, which they also did in the last movie. It’s a trade-off. If I wanted to add a little extra thing about Snake Eyes that I definitely wanted, we could put little seeds of it, but we really couldn’t go crazy into it. I think we get it established and set, and if the audience wants to see more, we’ll give them more.

Those are both terrible films, but Cage dying was a part of the MK storyline in the games anyway, so at least it was faithful. Cyclops being killed is a pretty infamous move in the X-Men franchise, one of the worst.

Yeah, I agree. X3 sucks, so killing off Cyclops is not exactly something that should be used as a good example of anything. MK is not exactly a franchise with a large cultural footprint (GI Joe is hardly the X-men, but is got more behind it than MK) and Johnny Cage isn't exactly the main hero of the MK franchise.

Duke, on the other hand, is the main hero, or at least one of the main heroes, of the Joe franchise, and killing him off after just one movie, after he just joins the team, totally sucks. And it seems unnecessary too; GI Joe is a global operation, we don't need such a dramatic reason to explain why he isn't in the second movie.

I would also be mad if they killed off Scarlett too. Ripcord I couldn't care less about though.

__________________

Mandroid. Mercenary. Scientist. Ninja. Each one a specialist. Together they are ...

That killing of Cyclops was the metaphorical powderkeg that started this whole "Cyclops sucks and everybody else is cooler" thing.

__________________
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses. - Henry Ford
-----------
Who the **** makes a movie and while planning it is like, "you know what this needs...is some Greg Kinnear."

henry, I believe it's Storm Shadow. I recall a clip that Storm Shadow is at Bruce Willis home and Storm Shadow says like he's got his own weapon or something. So it looks like Storm Shadow will ultimately turn good.

I think Snake Eyes kidnaps Storm Shadow to de-brainwash him. And I assume he's at some sort of ninja complex to take him back and his red ninja proteges give chase. That's just my prediction.

Yeah, I agree. X3 sucks, so killing off Cyclops is not exactly something that should be used as a good example of anything. MK is not exactly a franchise with a large cultural footprint (GI Joe is hardly the X-men, but is got more behind it than MK) and Johnny Cage isn't exactly the main hero of the MK franchise.

Duke, on the other hand, is the main hero, or at least one of the main heroes, of the Joe franchise, and killing him off after just one movie, after he just joins the team, totally sucks. And it seems unnecessary too; GI Joe is a global operation, we don't need such a dramatic reason to explain why he isn't in the second movie.

I would also be mad if they killed off Scarlett too. Ripcord I couldn't care less about though.

I totally agree with you. No matter what you think of the actor involved, the charactor of duke himself needs to be a part of the g.i.joe movies. If you have watched or read the comics you know how important the charactor of duke is. To kill off a main-stay charactor because of the actor currently playing him is just crazy to me. Why not just recast the role...period.

__________________
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses. - Henry Ford
-----------
Who the **** makes a movie and while planning it is like, "you know what this needs...is some Greg Kinnear."

Do you have what it takes??? I joined Cobra long ago....they are just now bringing this back to light?

__________________
"Well, aside from the need for corrective lenses and a tendency to be abducted by extraterrestrials involved in an international governmental conspiracy, the Mulder family passes genetic muster."
-Fox Mulder

Saw the 4 min thing in front of Hansel and Gretel. While it was definitely awesome its just the same friggen clips weve seen for over a year now. Hopefully theres more to the aciton then what the trailers show cause this flick already seems old. They better pull a ****load of cash in 3D sales for this wait.

Starting to look forward to this a little again now, watched the 1st movie the other day again and while it was dumb fun, with some great action sequences, I am hoping we get a lot more in the sequel.

Plus I hope Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow have bigger parts this time as well.

__________________

2017 movie ratings out of 10:

1)War For The Planet Of The Apes-9.5(2)Logan-9.5(3)Baby Driver-9.5(4)Wonder Woman-9(5)Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol.2-9(6)Spider-Man: Homecoming-8(7)John Wick 2-8(8)Split-8(9)Kong: Skull Island-7.5(10)Alien Covenant-7(11)Ghost In The Shell-7(12)POTC: Salazar's Revenge-7(13)Transformers: The Last Knight-4